Las Vegas Airport to be smoke free
Today’s newspaper had an article that on Friday, McCarran was going 100% No Smoking. They are planning to shut down the smoking lounges in the terminals and prohibit smoking anywhere inside any building.
I’ve stayed away from “right” or “wrong,” judgments in this discussion, but now I think it’s time to at least voice an opinion.
Selling and buying cigarettes is a legal act, sanctioned by our government and duly taxed. The gummint implicitly sanctions smoking by taxing it and not making it illegal. . . as they have marijuana. Smoking cigarettes is addictive, and being forced to not smoke for extended periods of time goes beyond inconveniencing people: It makes have cravings and physical withdrawl symptoms. While not smoking can be tolerated by smokers for short periods of time, being forced to not smoke for hours of time is unnecessarily mean spirited and punishing to many of our fellow humans.
Many airline flights last for hours. Where a short hop between LV and LA might be well under an hour flying time, you still need to add another couple of hours in the outbound airport and probably another half hour when arriving, by the time you (hopefully) retrieve your suitcase. A flight to the east coast might add another 3-4 hours to that time, and that is NOT counting layovers.
Nobody in my family is now a smoker, but we all were at different times in our lives. I can remember having one or two family members literally run through a non smoking airport during a layover so they could go outside and get a drag or two on a cigarette. It was awful for them, but they were addicted to the nicotine, or the psychology of cigarettes,
at that time.
In my opinion, I think that closing the smoking lounges at McCarran goes beyond protecting the lungs of non smokers and crosses the line into being both cruel and a bad business decision. Having flown with smokers at McCarran, I know that the smoking lounges pull a negative air pressure, compared to the terminals and that the only smoke smell at all is inside the lounges- not the public terminal. The only people being
exposed to secondhand smoke in or near the airport lounges are the smokers themselves.
Perhaps the powers that be at McCarran feel that the smoking ban might encourage more people to quit. Perhaps they feel they’re saving a life or two. Maybe, that is a rational justification for the airport-wide ban in and of itself. However, I sure as heck can’t see the removal of the smoking lounges doing much more than making smokers needlessly
uncomfortable. I feel the airport authority should go ahead with plans to ban smoking in the common areas, bar and food service areas and even the slot machine areas. These are areas where the non smoking general public moves about and cannot escape second hand smoke. However, I really feel that they should retain the smoking lounges for the comfort of smokers.
—Nonnymus—
Kevin April 22nd
I work at McCarran and you are dead wrong. The old smoking rooms did not contain the smoke and smell. I am a reformed ex-smoker who quit cold turkey after thirteen years of that nasty habit. I contacted Clark County officials for years about this problem. The people of Nevada voted for this partial smoking ban (one can still smoke in casinos and bars that don’t serve food). I am more than pleased that the folks who run the airport complied with the law.
The only problem now is that the nicotine addicts are huddled by the sliding doors and the smell sometimes comes into the terminal if the wind is blowing a certain way. Oh yeah, and the inconsiderate bastards who try to sneak one in the restroom really cause a stink. Wish there was a hefty fine for them!
Bill Young June 10th
A lot more people die when someone is under the influence of Acohol than die because someone is under the influence of nicotine. Perhaps we should also outlaw alcohol in the airport.
Add Yours
YOU